Criminal Standing changes

I read this somewhere, and I feel it’s appropriate as a response to your suggestion:

You don’t get to set the requirements for implementation to eve, your point respectfully is not valid.

Regards,
Cypr3ss.

2 Likes

That is only a drawback when that is a financial loss. When the death results in a reward, many times your ship costs it not.

It is still a drawback. But what you are looking for are absolutes in the sense that a crime cannot occur in the first place…which is lunacy.

I find it hilarious we are debating crime in a high security area of space.

It’s not crime free space…maybe YOU need to learn more about EVE.

I am strongly against afk mining

Yet what you are not realizing is that gankers are the only thing standing against a huge number of AFK fleets in HS. It would be zero risk ISK. It’s almost that now with all the ganking nerfs over the years.

i’d nerf high sec criminal activities

That’s because you fundamentally don’t understand both EVE and game mechanics… GL on your CSM run…please don’t cry when you are laughed out of the race.

It’s been suggested may times how to stop all three of your points…a feasible bounty system is easy to implement but CCP has no interest it seems. My theory is that it requires core code changes/additions as opposed to just minor twerks or new cookie cutter content.

Yeah it seems like a strange thing, but only when the emphasis is placed on the “highsec” part of that sentence.

When the emphasis is instead on a different part of the sentence “crime in space”, it isn’t so absurd.

Crime in space is clearly not reality. None of it is reality and “highsec” doesn’t correlate with anything more than a relative term.

Nothing is hilarious and it’s all hilarious at the same time. That’s sci-fi.

…i am absolutely insanely enraged about high sec…
…i’d nerf high sec criminal activities so hard…

Just wondering…

What actually would you do/suggest? Do you even know or is this all just emotions?

Also, why isn’t crime in RL 100% gone even when you have ultra tough penalties like death or life in prison?

1 Like

After having had the time to read that blog post you linked, I’m not entirely sure it is that good of an argument for removing criminal activity in eve.

The tl:dr of if is, that the victim can lose all their assets on a single loss, therefore it’s bad cause the victim will ponder on whether they should continue to play, since all their effort have been removed with a single loss.

However, everyone and all the official newbie resources will tell new players that they should not fly what they cannot afford to lose, i.e. don’t invest everything they have on a single ship they can risk losing. So not sure if this is even that relevant for eve. With it being a blog article, it is also just an opinion piece and it doesn’t reference any studies to support the claims in it. I was looking more for objective sources, like the survey from Quantic Foundry.

Can the NPE do a better job of teaching players about eve and what eve is? Yes, that is something I believe CCP could do a better job doing. Having the 8 golden rules of eve actually presented to new players in the tutorial (through a story narrative) would, in my opinion, be quite helpful.

Isk management is kind of like bankroll management in poker. The rational and logical way to play poker, is not to enter a single table with your whole bankroll. Instead distribute it out into several buy-ins, so you don’t go bankrupt in a single bad turn of events. However, should poker be “balanced” around bad players betting all their bankroll on a single hand?

The same logic should be employed in eve. We can try to teach people about risk management, but if someone decides to put all their isk in a single ship and autopilot it through Uedama, what can really be done?

4 Likes

That is exactly what these entitled types want…exactly.

Then post how to stop it all. Because every bounty suggestion I’ve ever seen has been abusable or utterly limited to the point of being useless.

As for the rest of it, as always, we need longer Concord timers because then the gankers bring fewer people since twice the time means half the ships needed, which makes it easier for active players to interfere with them.

We need real fittings on freighters and industrial ships because it creates actions for the ganked player to take, making their loss more fun because they actually feel like they had influence. While still leaving afk ships easy to kill.

And if you lock low sec status out of high sec stations how is someone meant to recover from it if they don’t have ships. It can’t be done without creating a potential hole that can’t be gotten out of for a ganker wanting to go straight. The change that is needed is tags shouldn’t be instant sec status but give it over a time period that won’t keep up with active ganking. So they can’t be used to bypass facpo and -5 while still actively ganking.

Here are the counters to your points…

  1. Bounty are abused to get cheap killrights against people who have not done anything to earn them.

Bounties would be only NPC issued and not the absolutely pointless player based way now. So you break the law, you get a bounty automatically placed on you.

  1. Bounty get farmed by alts as in the old system

If you want to be a bounty hunter then be one…why would that be a bad thing? Also, NPC would issue bounty permits (and you would be limited based on skill level to how many bounties you have open. So if I have BountyHunter skill at lvl3, then I could ask for 3 bounties. They would be issued randomly based on my SP level and agent standing.

  1. Bounty is so limited that it goes against the core principle of “Be able to waste money on anyone you want”.

Full bounty payout would be the norm, not the stupid current system.

We need real fittings on freighters and industrial ships

Yep…knew that this is where it was going…less responsibility for dumb miners and haulers.

How is actually having to fit your ship less responsibility for dumb people. It’s more responsibility for dumb people.

As to your bounty suggestions… so bounties now become a farmable npc isk faucet… wonderful, I can’t imagine how goons (as an example who are very good at manipulation) will possibly abuse that for income…
See bounty threads for why your bounty hunter random permit idea is useless also.

Look up fitting…fit ship…AKF mine/haul.Ya, that’s a tough one…

so bounties now become a farmable npc isk faucet

Please explain how it would be a faucet and how it would be manipulated…

  1. its actually after a criminal offence concord targets them, i think you are perhaps on about faction standings?
    suicide ganking doesnt effect faction standings, but yes, i imagine it would in real life and so should in game - the same as it should effect neutral logistics as a piratical offence i guess. Though i dont like the figures you give.
    PS. even at -10 sec status concord dont typically shoot you. bit weird.

  2. i think that it should only effect the faction in the area the attack is in, perhaps even restricting it somehow to regional police rather than faction if that were possible. Again, 1 standing is actually really REALLY high. so i would reduce that severely.

  3. -10 people are criminals, i have no idea why any station master in highsec would let them dock period.

  4. concord generally only attacks if a crimnal offence is made, not sure i would change that as the ships used are super powerful but perhaps the speed and severity of faction police efforts should scale with security status AND faction standing.

just my thoughts

o7

Perhaps but i believe an intelligent design could be made with some effort; though i also believe anything would also be better than the current system.

Again, every semi complete design people put forward already has holes in it. I’m not saying it’s impossible but when the eve forum hive mind hasn’t come up with better after years of trying, I’m ok with settling with the current system.

Die easily because if Concord timer is longer buffer tank won’t save you at all, you need active tank and offensive modules to reduce incoming dps and to be using overheat mechanics etc. So yeah, how does it help dumb people again?

ive not seen a proper design tbh, small suggestions that get lost in a myriad of posts.

And to be frank if bounty hunting players was a skill based thing with a lot of sp needed to collect full bounties and even in some highsec systems (or with a better more apt killrights system) id be all for it, afterall not everyone is going to skill up 20 million sp just to collect full bounty payments…‘just incase’

If it could be abused for profit gank groups would have specialized alts for it. They fly freighters for looting, this would be easier.

This is mine and nobody put any holes into it. You are welcome to try…

RE ship: You can already use tougher mining ships and put modules on them that will prevent ganks. But most do not because they want higher yields…you are fighting against human nature here…A Proc or Skiff is pretty much ignored by CODE as they are too strong. Why don’t more people use them? Becasue their yields are lower…

Im fine with it, its not like a good system wouldnt have some sort of restrictions on placing bounties either.

i mean if your in 0.5 with a low security status (but high enough to fly about -4.5 for example) with a 2 billion bounty on your head… wtf not?

Because then it becomes a feed it to the player via an alt mechanic. That’s why the current pay out is where it is. As literally any higher a percentage and you can make a profit on it after insurance.